When can attention influence binocular rivalry?

Dieter, Kevin C.; Melnick, Michael D.; Tadin, Duje

doi:10.3758/s13414-015-0905-6

Cited by 21 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(91 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent study showed that stimuli under CFS elicited high-level behavioral priming effects only under conditions of partial awareness, but not when fully suppressed (Gelbard-Sagiv et al, 2016). Similarly, a recent study demonstrated that manipulations of attention only affected dominance durations in a binocular rivalry paradigm around the time of perceptual transitions (Dieter et al, 2015). Another binocular rivalry study showed that the detection performance of monocular probes followed gradual changes in consciousness, rather than being dichotomous (Alais et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Between-Subject Variability in the Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Paradigm: Potential Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Gayet

Stein

2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent focus in the field of consciousness research involves investigating the propensity of initially non-conscious visual information to gain access to consciousness. A critical tool for measuring conscious access is the so-called breaking continuous flash suppression paradigm (b-CFS). In this paradigm, a high contrast dynamic pattern is presented to one eye, thereby temporarily suppressing a target stimulus that is presented to the other eye. The time it takes for observers to report (e.g., the location of) the initially suppressed stimulus provides a measure of conscious access. Typical observations in b-CFS studies include the finding that upright faces are released from suppression faster than inverted faces, and the finding that stimuli that match the current content of visual working memory are released from suppression faster than mismatching stimuli. Interestingly, the extent to which observers exhibit these effects varies extensively (in the range of hundreds of milliseconds). By re-analyzing existing datasets and a new dataset we establish that the difference in RTs between conditions in b-CFS tasks (i.e., the effect of interest) is highly correlated with participants' overall suppression durations, and with their trial-to-trial variability in RTs. We advocate the usage of a simple latency- normalization method, which (1) removes the between-subject variability in suppression duration from the effect of interest, while (2) providing distributions of RT differences that are better suited for parametric testing. We next compare this latency-normalization method to two other transformations that are widely applied on within-subject RT data (z-transformations and log-transformations). Finally, we tentatively discuss how trial-to-trial variability and overall suppression duration might relate to prolonged phases of shallow suppression that are more prone to modulations of conscious access.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Between-Subject Variability in the Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Paradigm: Potential Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Gayet

Stein

2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Observers who are instructed to "hold" one of the two rival targets dominant exhibit relatively little influence over the dynamics of binocular rivalry (3). Rivalry becomes more susceptible to selective modulation under conditions that promote the deployment of attention to features present in only one of the two rivalry targets (4)(5)(6)(7). However, compared with strong effects of visual attention on perception in other domains (8,9), these effects are modest and suggest additional limiting conditions on attention's ability to influence perception during binocular rivalry (10).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual training profoundly alters binocular rivalry through both sensory and attentional enhancements

Dieter

Melnick

Tadin

2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of attention, as well as its functional utility, are particularly prominent when selecting among multiple stimuli that compete for processing resources. However, existing studies have found that binocular rivalry-a phenomenon characterized by perceptual competition between incompatible stimuli presented to the two eyes-is only modestly influenced by selective attention. Here, we demonstrate that the relative resistance of binocular rivalry to selective modulations gradually erodes over the course of extended perceptual training that uses a demanding, featurebased attentional task. The final result was a dramatic alteration in binocular rivalry dynamics, leading to profound predominance of the trained stimulus. In some cases, trained observers saw the trained rival image nearly exclusively throughout 4-min viewing periods. This large change in binocular rivalry predominance was driven by two factors: task-independent, eye-specific changes in visual processing, as well as an enhanced ability of attention to promote predominance of the task-relevant stimulus. Notably, this strengthening of task-driven attention also exhibited eye specificity above and beyond that from observed sensory processing changes. These empirical results, along with simulations from a recently developed model of interocular suppression, reveal that stimulus predominance during binocular rivalry can be realized both through an eye-specific boost in processing of sensory information and through facilitated deployment of attention to taskrelevant features in the trained eye. Our findings highlight the interplay of attention and binocular rivalry at multiple visual processing stages and reveal that sustained training can substantially alter early visual mechanisms.visual attention | binocular rivalry | perceptual learning | visual plasticity F rom the earliest empirical reports of binocular rivalry (1), scientists have asked whether the fluctuating perceptual experience induced by presenting unmatched images to the two eyes ("binocular rivalry") could be willfully controlled by the observer. Despite early claims of nearly complete voluntary control (2), recent studies show that attention has only a modest selective impact during continuous viewing of binocular rivalry. Observers who are instructed to "hold" one of the two rival targets dominant exhibit relatively little influence over the dynamics of binocular rivalry (3). Rivalry becomes more susceptible to selective modulation under conditions that promote the deployment of attention to features present in only one of the two rivalry targets (4-7). However, compared with strong effects of visual attention on perception in other domains (8, 9), these effects are modest and suggest additional limiting conditions on attention's ability to influence perception during binocular rivalry (10). This is puzzling given that visual attention typically has its strongest effects in cases of visual competition (11), which notably include other, ostensibly related bistable stimuli [e.g., the Neck...

show abstract

“…Hence, it is possible that the increased salience might have contributed to suppression through attentional capture. However, attention alone cannot account for mask size and contrast effects, as it is more likely to influence BR dynamics at the end of dominance periods (Dieter, Melnick, & Tadin, 2015), when suppression is the weakest (Alais, Cass, O'Shea & Blake, 2010). Moreover, given that the task was to identify the orientation of the target, it seemed counterintuitive for participants to direct their attention to the mask and try to maintain its dominance.…”

Section: Discussion For Experiments 1-2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Continuous flash suppression operates in local spatial zones: Effects of mask size and contrast

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous flash suppression (CFS) is a technique in which presenting one eye with a dynamic Mondrian sequence prevents a low-contrast target in the other eye from being perceived for many seconds. Frequently used to study unconscious visual processing, CFS bears many similarities with binocular rivalry (BR), another popular dichoptic stimulation technique. It is therefore puzzling that the effect of mask size and contrast seem to differ between CFS and BR. To resolve this discrepancy, we conducted a systematic investigation on the effects of mask size and contrast in CFS. Also, building on findings from BR, we asked if the collinearity of the contours in the Mondrian masker play a role in CFS suppression. Our results showed a robust effect of mask contrast on suppression durations, and an effect of mask size that depended on collinearity.Specifically, higher mask contrasts produced longer suppression regardless of collinearity and mask size. Mask size, on the other hand, had little effect on suppression when collinearity was low and it weakened suppression when collinearity is high. These observations parallel prior findings in BR, further substantiating the close link between the two paradigms and demonstrating the usefulness of a shared explanatory framework describing both phenomena.Note. Sizes are measured in degrees of visual angle.

show abstract

When can attention influence binocular rivalry?

Cited by 21 publications

References 49 publications

Between-Subject Variability in the Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Paradigm: Potential Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Between-Subject Variability in the Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Paradigm: Potential Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Perceptual training profoundly alters binocular rivalry through both sensory and attentional enhancements

Continuous flash suppression operates in local spatial zones: Effects of mask size and contrast

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About